The field of the invention is nuclear magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) methods and systems. More particularly, the invention relates to dynamic studies in which a series of MR images are acquired at a high temporal resolution.
When a substance such as human tissue is subjected to a uniform magnetic field (polarizing field B0), the individual magnetic moments of the spins in the tissue attempt to align with this polarizing field, but precess about it in random order at their characteristic Larmor frequency. If the substance, or tissue, is subjected to a magnetic field (excitation field B1) which is in the x-y plane and which is near the Larmor frequency, the net aligned moment, Mz, may be rotated, or “tipped”, into the x-y plane to produce a net transverse magnetization. A NMR signal is emitted by the excited spins after the excitation signal B1 is terminated, and this NMR signal may be received and processed to form an image.
When utilizing these signals to produce images, magnetic field gradients (Gx, Gy and Gz) are employed. Typically, the region to be imaged is scanned, or sampled, by a sequence of measurement cycles in which these gradients vary according to the particular localization method being used. The resulting set of received NMR signals are digitized and processed to reconstruct the image using one of many well known reconstruction techniques.
There are many methods used to sample 2D or 3D “k-space” during an MRI scan. The most common method in use today is the Fourier transform (FT) imaging technique, which is frequently referred to as “spin-warp”. The spin-warp technique is discussed in an article entitled “Spin-Warp NMR Imaging and Applications to Human Whole-Body Imaging” by W. A. Edelstein et al., Physics in Medicine and Biology, Vol. 25, pp. 751-756 (1980). It employs a variable amplitude phase encoding magnetic field gradient pulse prior to the acquisition of NMR echo signals to phase encode spatial information in the direction of this gradient. In a two-dimensional implementation (2DFT), for example, spatial information is encoded in one direction by applying a phase encoding gradient (Gy) along that direction, and then an NMR echo signal is acquired in the presence of a readout magnetic field gradient (Gx) in a direction orthogonal to the phase encoding direction. The readout gradient present during the spin-echo acquisition encodes spatial information in the orthogonal direction. In a typical 2DFT pulse sequence, the magnitude of the phase encoding gradient pulse Gy is incremented (ΔGy) in the sequence of views that are acquired during the scan to produce a set of NMR data from which an entire image can be reconstructed. A 3DFT scan is similar except a second phase encoding gradient directed along the third axis is also stepped through a set of values.
To reduce the time needed to acquire data for an MR image multiple NMR signals may be acquired in the same pulse sequence. The echo-planar pulse sequence was proposed by Peter Mansfield (J. Phys. C. 10: L55-L58, 1977). In contrast to standard pulse sequences, the echo-planar pulse sequence produces a set of NMR signals for each RF excitation pulse. These NMR signals can be separately phase encoded so that an entire scan of 64 views can be acquired in a single pulse sequence of 20 to 100 milliseconds in duration. The advantages of echo-planar imaging (“EPI”) are well-known, and this method is commonly used where the clinical application requires a high temporal resolution. Echo-planar pulse sequences are disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,678,996; 4,733,188; 4,716,369; 4,355,282; 4,588,948 and 4,752,735.
A variant of the echo-planar imaging method is the Rapid Acquisition Relaxation Enhanced (RARE) sequence which is described by J. Hennig et al in an article in Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 3, 823-833 (1986) entitled “RARE Imaging: A Fast Imaging Method for Clinical MR.” The essential difference between the RARE (also called a fast spin-echo or FSE) sequence and the EPI sequence lies in the manner in which NMR echo signals are produced. The RARE sequence, utilizes RF refocused echoes generated from a Carr-Purcell-Meiboom-Gill sequence, while EPI methods employ gradient recalled echoes.
Other MRI pulse sequences are known which sample 2D or 3D k-space without using phase encoding gradients. These include the projection reconstruction methods known since the inception of magnetic resonance imaging and again being used as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,487,435. Rather than sampling k-space in a rectilinear, or Cartesian, scan pattern by stepping through phase encoding values as described above and shown in FIG. 2, projection reconstruction methods sample k-space with a series of views that sample radial lines extending outward from the center of k-space as shown in FIG. 3. The number of projection views needed to sample k-space determines the length of the scan and if an insufficient number of views are acquired, streak artifacts are produced in the reconstructed image. There are a number of variations of this straight line, radial sampling trajectory in which a curved path is sampled. These include spiral projection imaging and propeller projection imaging.
Recently, parallel MRI scanning methods using spatial information derived from the spatial distribution of the receive coils and a corresponding number of receiver channels has been proposed to accelerate MRI scanning. This includes the k-space sampling methods described in Sodickson D K, Manning W J, “Simultaneous Acquisition Of Spatial Harmonics (SMASH)” Fast Imaging With Radiofrequency Coil Arrays”, Magn. Reson. Med. 1997; 38(4):591-603, or Griswold M A, Jacob P M, Heidemann R M, Nittka M, Jellus V, Wang J, Kiefer B, Hasse A, “Generalized Autocalibrating Partially parallel Acquisitions (GRAPPA)”, Magn. Reson. Med. 2002; 47(6):1202-1210, or Pruessmann K P, Weiger M, Scheidegger M B, Boesiger P, “SENSE: Sensitivity Encoding For Fast MRI”, Magn. Reson. Med. 1999; 42(5):952-962, all of which share a similar theoretical background. Parallel MRI accelerates image data acquisition at the cost of reduced signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). The temporal acceleration rate is limited by the number of coils in the array and the number of separate receive channels, and the phase-encoding schemes used. Typically, acceleration factors of 2 or 3 are achieved.
Mathematically, the attainable acceleration in parallel MRI is limited by the available independent spatial information among the channels in the array. The parallel MRI image reconstruction manifests itself as a problem in solving an over-determined linear system using this spatial information. Therefore, advances in the coil array design with more coil elements and receiver channels can increase the acceleration rate when using the parallel MRI technique. Recently, optimized head coil arrays have been extended from 8-channel as described in de Zwart J A, Ledden P J, Kellman P, van Gelderen P. Duyn J H, “Design Of A SENSE-Optimized High-Sensitivity MRI Receive Coil For Brain Imaging”, Magn. Reson. Med. 2002; 47(6):1218-1227, to 16-channel as described in de Zwart J A, Ledden P J, van Gelderen P, Bodurka J, Chu R, Duyn J H, “Signal-To-Noise Ratio And Parallel Imaging Performance Of A 16-Channel Receive-Only Brain Coil Array At 3.0 Tesla”, Magn. Reson. Med. 2004; 51(1):22-26, as well as 23 and 90-channel arrays as described in Wiggins G C, Potthast A, Triantafyllou C, Lin F-H, Benner T, Wiggins C J, Wald L L, “A 96-Channel MRI System With 23- and 90-Channel Phase Array Head Coils At 1.5 Tesla”, 2005; Miami, Fla., USA, International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, p 671.
As described recently by McDougall M P, Wright S M, “64-Channel Array Coil For Single Echo Acquisition Magnetic Resonance Imaging”, Magn. Reson. Med. 2005; 54(2):386-392, a dedicated 64-channel linear planar array was developed to achieve 64-fold acceleration using a single echo acquisition (SEA) pulse sequence and a SENSE reconstruction method. The SEA approach depends on the linear array layout and localized RF coil sensitivity in individual receiver channels to eliminate the phase encoding steps required in conventional imaging. The challenge of this approach is the limited sensitivity in the perpendicular direction to the array plane and the extension of the methodology to head-shaped geometries.